About your Search

20130121
20130129
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
of the sitting president or the public was not over enchanted with the war in iraq when george w. bush ran for reelection. against john kerry, but voters by a small margin seen to believed bush would be the better leader. it cannot be said that the vote reflected a favorable referendum on george w. bush's first term. the importance of the communication skills of a candidate cannot be discounted as a factor, however. but all of this misses a different evaluation that merits being taken into account in judging between an income, barack obama, and his challenger, mitt romney. that is the chinks of the second term on too many presidents. 27 of 19 presidents -- only seven of 19 presidents elected to a second term avoid having a troubled or failed second term. that would give the country about a 30% chance of obama and the nation experiencing an improved security of economic climate. after four years if obama is reelected. i do not suggest that the gamble should not be taken. simply, that history into playing with politics might give us pause. so what does history predicted about a second term f
of a sitting president. the public was not over enchanted with the war in iraq when george w. bush ran for reelection. against john kerry, but voted by a small margin seem to believe bush should be the better theater cannot be with the vote reflected a favorable referendum on george w. bush's first term. the importance of the communication of a candidate cannot be discounted as a factor however. but all of this misses a different valuation of mayors being taken into account in judging between incumbent or obama and his challenger, and that rummy. that is the of the second term on so many presidents. only seven of 19 presidents elected to a second term avoided having a troubled or failed second term. i would give the country about a 30% chance of obama and the nation next. cnn improved security and economic climate. after four years if obama is reelected. i do not suggest the campbell should not be taken, simply that history playing with politics might give us pause. so what does history project about a second term for barack obama? where he reelect it was so few president having succes
-- [inaudible] [laughter] we both use a little german. when george w. bush appointed an old family retainer i did a poem that rhymed with -- [inaudible] [laughter] and we both write about animals sometimes. he famously wrote a lot of things about cats. my daughter said once at the dinner table when somebody brought up cats, daddy hates cats. and i said daddy does not hate cat. that would be prejudiced, and you girls have been brought up to not have prejudice daddy has never met a cat he likes. [laughter] and i've written about corp. kor g.i.s. i wrote in a column once that corp. the dogs look like a breed of dogs that look like they have been assembled from oh parts of dogs. not the part that the breeds were sorry about giving up. [laughter] i'll admit there's never been a broadway show called cor g.i. i'm a second generation poet. my father was a grocer for most of his working life, but he had a restaurant for a few years, and he took advantage of that to write a menu at lunch every day. mostly about pie. not pi pie. pie. i had a lot of trouble with pi when i was in high school. math was my
of the george w. bush administration. this brings me to another critically important part of our book, which is how the islamic republic of iran has become the biggest that issue of american mistakes and are ongoing decline in the middle east. in our book, we lay out how by pursuing a foreign policy and building a domestic political order that attracts publics, the islamic republic of iran has been able to take an impeach of american mistakes, to improve its own position dramatically. the key to the islamic republic successes has been that beyond the shift in the distribution of power, who has power in the middle east is a detailed earlier, something even more important is happening and that is the middle east will power itself is changing. it is now increasingly less defined by hard military capabilities for the united states has a clear advantage in the islamic republic of iran is relatively positioned and more defined in terms of the balance of influence are the islamic republic of iran has real unique advantages. as we explained in our book, the islamic republic is encouraging and taken
not just idiosyncratic, ideologically-generated products of the george w. bush administration. as we describe in our book, these stem from a much deeper source that cuts across both democratic and republican administrations, and it's something we describe as the united states, essentially, giving in to a post-cold war temptation to act as an imperial power in the middle east. and it is this imperial turn in america's middle east policies pursued with very little regard for realities on the ground in the middle east that have proven not just quixotic, but deeply damaging to american interests. as a candidate back in twaipt, now-president obama then seemed to really understand this. he talked about it courageously during the campaign. he pledged to not just withdraw american troops from iraq, but to change what he called the american mindset that had gotten us into the strategic mistake of invading iraq in the first place. he pledged to really change america's middle east policies. but instead the obama administration has pursued the same sorts of policies as its predecessors, the same
of the former press secretary of president george w. bush? did you ever get to interviewing that author, the father of scott mcclellan? >> i didn't interview him. all i can say about lyndon johnson's role in the assassination is in all my years of working on lyndon johnson's papers and going for his diaries like everything else, all the people close to him, i never found the slightest hint that he had anything to do with the assassination. yes, sir? >> lbj is well remembered as someone who was very adept at gaining the senate and working with congress as president, difficult things done. how well did he do getting things done with a polarized environment? >> that is a terrific question. it is hard to answer, if part of the answer is the following, when lyndon johnson became majority leader of the senate in 1955 the senate was and has been for decades, let's put it that way, same mess, hard to believe, the same dysfunctional mess and it is today. bills couldn't get past. the power in front of the president wasn't a party, republicans against democrats, half of the democrats in the senate
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6